On Jul 14, 5:30 pm, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> > Has this
> > already been done, or should I file a patch for this?
>
> If you would be so kind... I saw no mention of it until I read your
> message :-)
Done, including patch, at
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9598
Also, I'll mention that
On 15 July 2010 16:38, Robert Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 1:51 PM, David Kirkby wrote:
>> 3) GLPK should be built before R if we ever hope to use it in R
>> 4) GLPK should be built before CVXOPT if there is any hope of using
>> those together.
>
> Shouldn't we wait until we implement
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 1:51 PM, David Kirkby wrote:
> 3) GLPK should be built before R if we ever hope to use it in R
> 4) GLPK should be built before CVXOPT if there is any hope of using
> those together.
Shouldn't we wait until we implement using GLPK from these? Otherwise
we are potentially s
> > Has this
> > already been done, or should I file a patch for this?
>
> If you would be so kind... I saw no mention of it until I read your
> message :-)
Ok, I'll do it in the next couple of days, taking into account David's
comment about skpg build order.
Nathan
--
To post to this group, s
On 15 July 2010 12:29, François Bissey wrote:
>> In my email above, I just appended '$(INST)/$(GLPK)' to the end of the
>> CVXOPT line as it currently is in spkg/standard/deps.. I did not add
>> NUMPY myself. If a dependency can be removed, it would be useful, as
>> it might permit more efficient
> In my email above, I just appended '$(INST)/$(GLPK)' to the end of the
> CVXOPT line as it currently is in spkg/standard/deps.. I did not add
> NUMPY myself. If a dependency can be removed, it would be useful, as
> it might permit more efficient parallel builds.
sorry Dave, I didn't imply you di
On 15 July 2010 10:04, François Bissey wrote:
>> On 07/14/10 10:58 PM, Nathan Dunfield wrote:
>> I strongly suspect you would also need to make sure glpk builds before
>> cvxopt by editing spkg/standard/deps. The cvxopt entry would then look
>> like this.
>>
>>
>> $(INST)/$(CVXOPT): $(BASE) $(INS
CVXOPT has no dependencies on Numpy (but can exchange data with
Numpy arrays efficiently via a buffer protocol).
On Jul 15, 11:04 am, François Bissey wrote:
> > On 07/14/10 10:58 PM, Nathan Dunfield wrote:
> > >> On a similar note cvxopt can make use of glpk as well.
>
> > > Yes, it can --- I was
> On 07/14/10 10:58 PM, Nathan Dunfield wrote:
> >> On a similar note cvxopt can make use of glpk as well.
> >
> > Yes, it can --- I was just using this yesterday.
> >
> > The trick is that you have to tell cvxopt that glpk is available when
> > it is compiled/installed. Now that glpk is standa
On 07/14/10 10:58 PM, Nathan Dunfield wrote:
On a similar note cvxopt can make use of glpk as well.
Yes, it can --- I was just using this yesterday.
The trick is that you have to tell cvxopt that glpk is available when
it is compiled/installed. Now that glpk is standard, the install
script f
> Has this
> already been done, or should I file a patch for this?
If you would be so kind... I saw no mention of it until I read your
message :-)
Nathann
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubsc
> On a similar note cvxopt can make use of glpk as well.
Yes, it can --- I was just using this yesterday.
The trick is that you have to tell cvxopt that glpk is available when
it is compiled/installed. Now that glpk is standard, the install
script for cvxopt should be told to make use of it.
12 matches
Mail list logo
